spa 5 mitigation overview - chapman blogs...spa 5 mitigation overview ... project (assess...

Neighborhood Advisory Committee

SPA 5 Mitigation Overview

Chapman UniversityMay 24, 2016

&

Meeting Objectives

Review of CEQA impact significance

Recap of elements of SPA 5 (adopted 2004)

Discussion of adopted mitigation measures for SPA 5

2

3CEQA 201

How is a Significant Impact Determined? Identify baseline condition (existing environment)

Quantify the changes from constructing and operating the

project (assess environmental impacts)

Determine whether or not the changes are significant (apply

significance criteria)

Propose mitigation measures for the significant impacts

Determine whether mitigation measures reduce impact to

less than significant (residual impact)

Contents of an EIR

Table of Contents Summary Project Description Environmental Analysis

• Environmental Setting/Existing Conditions

• Significance Thresholds• Impacts• Mitigation

Measures/Residual Alternatives

Cumulative Impacts Significant Irreversible

Environmental Changes Growth Inducing Impacts Effects Found Not to be

Significant References, including

organizations and persons consulted

List of Preparers

4

Environmental Analysis SPA 5 EIR

Aesthetics Agriculture & Forestry

Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology, Soils,

Seismicity Greenhouse Gas

Emissions Hazardous & Hazardous

Materials Hydrology and Water

Quality

Land Use & Planning Mineral Resources Noise and Vibration Public Services

(police, fire, schools, libraries) Parks and Recreation Population and Housing Recreational Resources Transportation and Traffic Utilities & Service Systems

(water supply, wastewater infrastructure, solid waste, energy conservation)

5

Recap of SPA 56

Previously Adopted SP

Area of Interest

Potential Growth Area

Areas Added in SPA 5

Old Towne District Northern Boundary

National Register of Historic Places Northern Boundary

Southwest RedevelopmentArea Northern Boundary

SPA 5 Overview7

SPA 5 Overview

Incorporated 17.22 acres of currently owned property into SP area (40.35 ac to 57.47 ac)

Established new Academic 2 land use category to provide for development of Dodge College of Film & Media Arts and support uses

Defined Area of Interest and Potential Growth Area

Consolidated criteria from several governing policy documents

Provided historic preservation / enhancement guidelines

8

SPA 5 Overview

Addressed edge transition criteria / campus-community interface through context planning guidelines and building setback + height requirements

Enhanced architectural, landscape and signage guidelines

Addressed parking needs and strategies / developed demand ratios

Clarified implementation review process

Identified a maximum of 5,000 seats / 8,715 students

9

SPA 5 Area10

SPA 5 Implementation Process11

Key Projects Implemented Under SPA 5 12

Marion Knott Studios Attallah Piazza

Global Citizens Plaza

Wilson Field Allred Aquatics Center

Beckman Hall Exterior Renovation Argyros Forum Renovation Doti Hall

Digital Media Arts Center Hilbert Museum of California Art Center for Science & TechnologySandhu Residence Hall

Mitigation Measures – Historical Resources13

Impacts: SPA 5 will incrementally contribute to significant impacts on historical resources. Impacts are individually and cumulative significant, and unavoidable. Structures of local historic value are those that have been identified in the Orange Historic Survey.

MM 1• Structures of local historic value within parcels acquired by the

University shall be preserved to the extent feasible through their use as faculty/staff /student housing, administrative offices, or other compatible uses. The University shall establish a program whereby the architectural integrity of the houses identified for preservation are maintained through a condition of occupancy.

MM 2• For historic structures which cannot be feasibly preserved in their

present location, the University shall use its best effort to relocate those structures to another site on campus or elsewhere in the Old Towne District. If a feasible location is not found, the University may relocate the structures within City of Orange.

MM 3• Historic structures that are not preserved or relocated shall be photo

documented by a qualified architectural historian and salvageable historic features shall be banked, stored, and offered for salvage.

Scope: o Project-Specific and Cumulative

Status: o Completed for all projects to date

Level of Significance: o MM1 – mitigated to less than significant

MM2 to 3 – significant, unavoidable

Time Frame for Implementation: o MM1 – Prior to occupancy o MM2 – Prior to issuance of demolition permito MM3 – Prior to issuance of demolition permit

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o Community Development Department


MM 4• The historic integrity of buildings within the Historic District that are

owned by the University shall be addressed through implementation of the design guidelines established in the SPA 5. Based on the SPA 5, the University shall provide the following: A. A historic resources evaluation shall be conducted for buildings within the Specific Plan

Area that are a contributing element to the Historic District (1997 or later historic building survey), prior to any alteration.

B. Buildings found not to be contributing elements to the Historic District may be modified or demolished to accommodate University uses, although such modifications or demolition shall consider the context, scale, and character of the surrounding uses as provided in the Specific Plan document (Section 7.4) and be in accordance with City of Orange CEQA Guidelines.

C. Buildings found to be contributing elements to the Historic District shall not be modified except through the following process: i. Consider preservation (avoidance) options. ii. Implement Adaptive Reuse Guidelines that would minimize physical alteration to

include, but not be limited to the Villa Park Orchards packing house and Anaconda West Building.

iii. Implement physical alterations that do not jeopardize the contributing elements of the structure.

iv. Implement physical alterations consistent with Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (adaptive use and restoration options).

v. In certain cases, consider relocation of entire structures to other acceptable sites in the community.

vi. As a last resort, demolition shall include a documentation process, in accordance with City of Orange CEQA Guidelines and the Specific Plan document (Section 7.4).

vii. Take efforts to salvage historical features. D. This process would include consultation with Old Towne Preservation Association and

Orange Barrio Historical Society.



Level of Significance: o Potential impacts are significant and

unavoidable

Time Frame for Implementation: o MM4A – Prior to occupation or prior to any

alterationso MM4B – Subsequent to historic resources

evaluation & prior to demolition permito MM4C – Subsequent to historic resources

evaluation & prior to permits for occupancy, alteration, and/or demolition permit, as applicable

o MM4D – Prior to occupancy, alteration, and/or demolition, as applicable

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o Community Development Department, Old

Towne Preservation Association, and Orange Barrio Historical Society


Impacts: Impacts of demolishing the California Wire and Cable Company and California Cordage Company are significant and unavoidable. MM 5

• Prior to demolition of the existing industrial buildings formerly housing the California Wire and Cable Company and California Cordage Plant, the historic features and uses that contributed to the history of the City of Orange shall be documented as follows:

A. Chapman University shall fund a formal survey and record of the subject buildings by an accepted method of historical documentation, such as Level III Historic American Building Survey (HABS) or other equivalent method. The documentation shall be prepared by an entity that is experienced with historic documentation.

B. Chapman University shall prepare an original documentary film record and corresponding original written documentation that includes: 1) the cultural history of the neighborhood generally bounded by Walnut Avenue to the north, Palm Avenue to the south, Glassell Street to the east, and the AT & SF Railroad to the west (sometimes referred to as “Cypress Street Neighborhood” or Orange Barrio”); and 2) the history of the California Wire and Cable Company and California Cordage Plant (Anaconda East and West). Chapman University shall also, with the permission of the respective building owners, research and write a historical narrative for the following buildings: the Villa Park Orchards Packinghouse, the Cypress Street School (544 N. Cypress Street), the Old Quaker Church/Friendly Center (424 N. Cypress Street), the mural on garages at 440 N. Cypress Street, and four properties located between Cypress and Lemon (337 and 343 N. Cypress and 328 and 336 N. Lemon). The written documentation shall be completed within one year of the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy of the School of Film and Television, and three copies shall be provided to Orange Public Library for its archives. [This section was abbreviated for length]

C. A meaningful element of the existing buildings, interpretive art work, or other monument reflecting the history of the site shall be commissioned and erected at a prominent location on the film school site.

D. Building design shall incorporate elements that reflect the physical and historical context of the site.

E. Consultation with the Old Town Preservation Association and Orange Barrio Historical Society shall be conducted.


Status: o Completed

Level of Significance: o Potential impacts are significant and

unavoidable

Time Frame for Implementation: o MM5A – Prior to demolitiono MM5B – Prior to demolitiono MM5C – Prior to occupancyo MM5D – Prior to building permito MM5E – Prior to demolition

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o Community Development Department


Impacts: Adverse impact may result from subsurface excavation in SPA Areas 1 and 2.

MM 6• If subsurface excavation is required for further planned development

within Areas 1 and 2, a qualified historical archaeologist shall be contacted during these excavations in the event that such features are uncovered (a qualified city-accepted archaeologist shall be identified in construction documents). If these features are discovered, work shall halt in that area until the historical archaeologist determines the best treatment for the resource.



Level of Significance: o Potential impacts are mitigated

to less than significant levels

Time Frame for Implementation: o MM6 – During subsurface excavation,

upon discovery of historic archeological features

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o City approved, qualified historical

archaeologist, provided by Chapman University

Mitigation Measures – Land Use17

Impacts: Development of the specific plan could result in incompatible land uses relative to predominantly surrounding residential areas. Incorporation of proposed University expansion areas into the specific plan area would change the nature of existing uses.

MM 1• The University shall acquire the parcels as they become available on

the open market.

MM 2• The University shall pay fair market values for these parcels. Fair

market value is assured because homeowners shall not be compelled to sell to the University.

MM 3• Any building or site acquired by the University shall be maintained in

good condition in order to maintain the quality of the neighborhood and historic district, and the property values of University-owned and surrounding properties. The property shall be maintained in accordance with the City’s Property Maintenance Ordinance.

MM 4• Future development within the Specific Plan Area shall be in

accordance with the development standards of the Specific Plan.

Scope: o Project-Specific


Level of Significance: o Potential impacts will be mitigated


Time Frame for Implementation: o MM1 – Upon availabilityo MM2 – Upon purchaseo MM3 – Upon acquisition & during

ownershipo MM4 – Prior to future project site plan

approval

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o MM1 – Chapman Universityo MM2 to 4 – Community Development


MM 5• Future development within the Specific Plan Area shall be compatible

with other projects on the campus and shall be consistent with the regulations and design guidelines of the approved Specific Plan.

MM 6• The Specific Plan shall establish setbacks for University related uses

adjacent to residential, commercial, and public streets. The following setbacks shall be enforced for all future development on the campus:

A. Where a University property is adjacent to residential properties, all existing setbacks adjacent to the residential uses shall be adhered to as specified in the Specific Plan document.

B. A building setback of 20 feet shall be used between Palm Avenue and Sycamore Avenue where the University borders North Glassell Avenue.

C. Where a University property is adjacent to a public street, the setbacks shall be as identified in Table 4.5-1 (p. 4-55 of this document).

D. Building heights shall be reduced for buildings within 120 feet of a residentially zoned property. Reductions in building heights shall consider compatibility, privacy, natural lighting, and shadow based on the scale, height, and setback of the proposed building.

MM 7• The proposed uses on the expansion sites shall comply with detailed

development standards and design guidelines contained within the SPA 5 document. See Land Use Regulations and Context Planning, Historic Preservation, and Enhancement Guidelines.





Time Frame for Implementation: o Prior to site plan approval

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o Community Development


MM 8• Use of a residential building for any nonresidential uses must comply

with the appropriate use standards herein for the planning unit of the Specific Plan it is located within and is consistent with the UBC, the UFC, and the Specific Plan Site Plan Review.

MM 9• The campus F.A.R. shall not exceed 1.0, excluding parking structures.

F.A.R. transfer of up to an additional 25% on a site shall be permitted, so long as the F.A.R. of 1.0 on the overall campus is not exceeded. Such F.A.R. transfers shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director.

MM 10• At the time of site plan review, the University shall submit a summary of

current building square footage, parking, and classroom capacity up to the maximum allowable by the Specific Plan.





Time Frame for Implementation: o MM8 – Prior to site plan approvalo MM9 – Prior to site plan approvalo MM10 – Prior to site plan submittal


Mitigation Measures – Visual Impacts20

Impacts: Potential to significantly alter the aesthetic character of the SPA area and introduce additional sources of light and glare and shade and shadow. Project will cumulatively contribute to changes in perceived aesthetic quality of the historic structures on-site.

MM 1• Individual buildings on-site shall be located so that residential

neighborhoods adjacent to the campus are not significantly impacted by shadows. For each structure over 32 feet in height, the campus shall submit a solar shadow study at the time of Site Plan Review to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. A significant shade and shadow impact would occur if shadow-sensitive uses are shaded by project structures at anytime between the hours of 9:00 am and 4:00 pm. Shadow sensitive uses include offsite residential structures and rear yard patio areas, public parks and recreation areas, and public schools. For purposes of this determination, the shadow impacts shall be plotted for winter solstice (December 22nd) and summer solstice (June 22nd) using a methodology acceptable to the City of Orange. No Site Plan shall be approved, nor any structure in excess of 32 feet built, that would result in a significant impact as determined using these criteria.

MM 2• Roof-mounted equipment on future structures shall be screened from

off-site.

Scope: o Project-Specific and cumulative




Time Frame for Implementation: o Prior to site plan review


Mitigation Measures – Visual Impacts21

MM 3• During development plan review process, all architectural and

landscape design plans and plant palettes shall be reviewed and approved by the City.

MM 4• All proposed development on the expansion sites shall comply with

development standards (i.e., building siting, height, setbacks, architecture, landscaping, perimeter walls, fences, etc.) and design guidelines established in the SPA 5. Elements that enhance neighborhood identity, character, or the “image” of the plan area, as well as livability, shall be maintained and/or encouraged whenever possible. Based on neighborhood and site assessment, such characteristics shall be identified and maintained, enhanced, and/or duplicated.

MM 5• Future development shall respond to the aesthetic expectations of the

surrounding community by designing and locating facilities in a manner that preserves and enhances desirable features of local and neighborhood areas and promotes their sense of identity.

MM 6• Future development shall consider the continuity relative to the Orange

Barrio and Old Towne, and the transition/pedestrian connections between Orange Barrio and Old Towne

Scope: o Project-Specific and cumulative




Time Frame for Implementation: o Prior to site plan review


Mitigation Measures – Noise22

Impacts: Noise generated during construction activities will be clearly audible at residential locations nearest the project sites. It is especially important to avoid noisy activities between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. when the public is much more sensitive to noise. Impacts related to construction vibration would depend on the amount of construction activity planned under each phase. Though no significant impacts were envisioned, a measure to evaluate vibration potential for new projects would ensure impacts remained less than significant.

MM 1• Construction activities shall comply with the City of Orange Noise

Ordinance, which limits the hours of construction to normal weekday working hours.

MM 2• All construction equipment shall be equipped with standard mufflers

and engine shields to minimize noise.

MM 3• All construction traffic, especially trucks, shall utilize streets and parking

areas designated by the City.

MM 4• Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified acoustical consultant

will review final construction plans in relation to surrounding land uses for any potential vibration related impacts. All necessary mitigation measures determined at that time will be incorporated in the project.





Time Frame for Implementation: o MM1 to 3 – During constructiono MM4 – Prior to grading permit

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o MM1 to 4 – Public Works & Community

Development

Mitigation Measures – Noise23

Impacts: Relative to operations, uses related to operation of the School of Film and Television are likely to create impacts in the surrounding community due to potential for outdoor entertainment, parking lots and structures, and truck deliveries. Impacts due to additional traffic on City streets was less than significant.

MM 5• Outdoor entertainment at the School of Film and Television – Direct

exposure to the community shall be minimized and activities that extend past 10 p.m. (for outdoor activities) and 11.00 p.m. (for indoor activities) shall be avoided.

MM 6• Parking lots and parking structures –These facilities shall be screened

from the community by landscaping or walls, using line-of-sight criterion.

MM 7• Trucks – Wherever feasible, in areas where truck traffic is planned,

walls or barriers shall be constructed to minimize noise impacts on community neighbors.

MM 8• Any on-campus equipment or activity shall be required to comply with

the City of Orange Noise Ordinance.

MM 9• All mechanical sweeping operations shall be confined to daytime hours

(7 a.m. to 10 p.m.).





Time Frame for Implementation: o MM5 – During outdoor/indoor activitieso MM6 to MM9 – During operations

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o MM5 to MM9 – Chapman University

Mitigation Measures – Population and Housing24

Impacts: No impacts on population. Potential reduction in housing stock and provision of incompatible uses (including conversions).

MM 1 and MM2 • Same as Land Use – acquire parcels on open market and pay fair

market value.

MM 3• Future development within the Specific Plan Area shall be compatible

with other projects on the campus and shall be consistent with the regulations and design guidelines of the Specific Plan.

MM 4• Any building or site that is acquired by the University shall be

maintained to a similar standard as adjacent neighboring properties to maintain the quality of the neighborhood and property values.

MM 5• The proposed uses on the expansion sites shall comply with detailed

development standards and design guidelines contained within the SPA 5 document.

MM 6• If a proposed project includes relocation or demolition of three or more

homes, Chapman University shall prepare and implement a relocation plan, whereby the impacted homes may be moved to another site within the Old Towne District. If a feasible location is not found, the University may consider land banking and/or site identification within the City of Orange.

Scope: o Project-specific and cumulative




Time Frame for Implementation: o MM1 – Upon availabilityo MM2 – Upon purchaseo MM3 – Prior to site plan approvalo MM4 – Upon acquisition & during

ownershipo MM5 – Prior to site plan reviewo MM6 – Prior to site plan approval and/or

relocation or demolition permit

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o MM1 – Chapman Universityo MM2 to 6 – Community Development

Mitigation Measures – Transportation25

Impacts: The proposed project would have significant site specific and cumulative impacts on specific roadways and intersections in the Chapman traffic study area.

MM 1• Develop future surface and structured Campus parking facilities with

the greatest proximity to, and access along, key collector and arterial streets (i.e., Glassell Street, Walnut Avenue, and Palm Avenue) to minimize the attraction to local residential roadways.

MM 2• The location and design of parking areas shall not encourage mid-block

pedestrian movements.

MM 3• Incorporate enhanced transit access accommodations along Glassell

Street and future Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) routes in accordance with OCTA standards to include schedule information, shelters, and turnouts, as appropriate, and in support of Metrolink service and nearby stations.

MM 4• As classroom capacity becomes available, attempt to schedule classes

to avoid starting and ending times within the AM and PM on-street peak hours. Such a practice would serve to reduce traffic increments identified for the future worst-case expansion scenarios.

MM 5• Strategically schedule special campus events to avoid arrivals and

departures during those same periods.





Time Frame for Implementation: o MM1 – Prior to site plan approvalo MM2 – Prior to site plan approvalo MM3 – Upon confirmation of OCTAo MM4 – Upon classroom capacity

availabilityo MM5 – During campus special events

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o MM1 to 3 – Public Workso MM4 to 5 – Chapman University and

Public Works


MM6 through MM8 are provided to alleviate the project’s significant traffic impacts to a less than significant.

MM 6• Year 2005 and Year 2016 deficiencies at impacted intersections shall

be addressed by implementation of the recommended mitigation measures (through signalization at five currently stop-controlled intersections, restriping at the Lemon Street @ Chapman Avenue intersection, and Chapman University’s fairshare contribution to the City-planned improvements at the Tustin Street @ Chapman Avenue intersection)

The project’s significant traffic impacts along two key roadway segments (i.e., Walnut Avenue both west and east of Center Street) in the Year 2016 shall be alleviated through installation of a traffic signal at the Center Street @ Walnut Avenue intersection. This mitigation measure shall also address the project’s impact on an intersection basis (i.e., related to increases in pedestrian activity generated by the addition of residence hall beds by the Year 2016 at the Center Street @ Walnut Avenue intersection). In conjunction with signalizing the Center Street @ Walnut Avenue intersection in the Year 2016, a coordinated traffic signal shall be installed at the Shaffer Street @ Walnut Avenue intersection to address the short distance of 288 feet between the two intersections.

Continued ->


Status: o Completed (improvements shown in red)o Improvements not yet provided are

monitored annually or periodically through updated traffic reports for major projects.



Time Frame for Implementation: o As determined by the Year 2005 and 2016

Traffic Conditions Reports

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o Public Works


MM 6 (continued)Chapman University already has adopted a monitoring program related to parking, which corresponds to the City-approved Parking management Plan (PMP). Two other monitoring programs are recommended to address traffic-related issues and significant traffic impacts identified in this study. These two monitoring programs relate to:

• Walnut Avenue between Glassell Street and Center Street (expected to be significantly impacted by the project during a typical weekday in the Year 2016)

• Glassell Street @ Palm Avenue intersection (existing traffic volumes meet traffic signal warrants; expected to be significantly impacted by the project during the AM and PM peak hours in the Year 2005)

The monitoring program for Walnut Avenue will involve a review of the traffic conditions (on a typical weekday) along Walnut Avenue between Glassell Street and Center Street. The review will be performed on an annual basis, unless there is a project proposed by the University that may add significant volumes to Walnut Avenue between Glassell Street and Center Street. If the monitoring program identifies that roadway traffic thresholds have been met, then physical improvements (i.e., roadway restriping, reconfiguration, widening, etc.) will be implemented to provide four travel lanes along Walnut Avenue between GlassellStreet and Center Street.

Continued ->










MM 6 (continued)It is recommended that an intermittent monitoring program be established for the Glassell Street @ Palm Avenue intersection to review its operations once it is signalized.

Table 4.7-13 quantifies the project’s probable percent “fair-share” for mitigating significant impacts at the key intersections. The project’s percent share was calculated based upon a ratio between the project-generated traffic volumes versus the total growth (due to ambient/ background growth through the Year 2005 and Year 2016, cumulative development projects, and the Chapman University project).

The fair-share contribution percentages reported in Table 4.7-13 are based upon the findings and traffic forecasts of the traffic study. However, as part of the City’s monitoring program for the installation of future traffic signals and street/intersection improvements, and as future traffic studies are performed to evaluate future projects in the Specific Plan, Chapman University’s fairshare contribution calculations should be updated accordingly.










MM 7• To address the project’s significant traffic impact to a less than

significant level at the Lemon Street @ Chapman Avenue intersection in the Year 2016, the northbound approach and southbound approach shall be restriped to provide one left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. No additional right-of-way shall be necessary. This shall require the relocation of the U.S. Postal Service mailboxes currently located on the southwest corner of the intersection to another location deemed appropriate by the U.S. Postal Service office in Orange. North of Chapman Avenue, the recommended mitigation measure shall require the removal of five on-street parking spaces on the west side of Lemon Street, and the removal of six on-street spaces on the east side of Lemon Street. South of Chapman Avenue, two on-street spaces shall need to be removed on the west side of Lemon Street, and four on-street spaces shall need to be removed on the east side of Lemon Street.

MM 8• To mitigate the project’s significant traffic impact at the Tustin Street @

Chapman Avenue under Year 2016 conditions, the project shall contribute to the City planned improvements at the intersection (i.e., additional through lane on the westbound and eastbound approaches, plus exclusive right-turn lanes on each approach of the intersection) on a fair-share basis. The City’s design plans have been obtained and are included in Appendix E.


Status: o Completed for all projects to dateo MM8 - Completed



Time Frame for Implementation: o Implemented at City discretion and funded

by fairshare contribution

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o Public Works Department


Impacts: The additional students and faculty would increase demand for dedicated parking. The total parking requirements are 2,426 spaces in Year 2005 and 3,610 spaces in the Year 2016. The existing supply of 1,994 spaces combined with near-term planned construction (Chapel, Sycamore Lot, and film school) would increase the Year 2005 supply to 2,694 spaces – a 268 space surplus.

The Year 2016 parking supply was not projected, but considered potentially significant.

MM 9• Maintain the current parking registration program to specifically include

mandatory registration of all commuter student, resident students, and employee vehicles.

MM 10• With future campus enhancement and expansions, design ratios of

0.47 spaces per seat and 0.60 spaces per bed shall be applied. Chapman University already has adopted a monitoring program related to parking, which corresponds to the City-approved Parking Management Plan (PMP). The PMP requires an annual review of actual parking conditions in and around the University. The parking ratios to guide future parking provisions at the University were derived from a first series of studies that are now being repeated annually. The review process is referred to as the annual "PMP report card". Given the annual reviews, these parking ratios will be validated on a continuing basis.


Status: o Completed for all projects to dateo Currently a surplus of parking based on

2016 PMP report card.



Time Frame for Implementation: o MM9 – ongoing requiremento MM10 – Annual review of the Parking

Management Plan

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o MM9 – Chapman Universityo MM10 – Public Works Department


MM 11• Spaces shall be allocated in accordance with indicated ratios, based on

user destination and the most convenient parking location.

MM 12• Parking lot locations and design should discourage midblock pedestrian

crossings.

MM 13• Maintain the practice of scheduling special events to avoid peak class

schedule days at the campus, and of implementing additional parking and traffic management programs in conjunction with those events. Such practices include advance parking/traffic information to event attendees, supplementary traffic direction and personnel, use of temporary overflow facilities (i.e., the athletic field) and working with the City and adjacent community for a temporary suspension of the Residential Permit Program. Special notification and signage will be provided so that overflow parking may be directed to alternative parking locations.

MM 14• The Parking Management Plan established for the University shall be

updated annually and shall be included and considered as part of the Environmental Checklist evaluation for any new project.





Time Frame for Implementation: o MM11 – On-going requirement & prior to

site plan approvalo MM12 – Prior to site plan approvalo MM13 – During campus special eventso MM14 – Annual PMP Implementation/

review

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o MM11 – Chapman University & Public

Workso MM12 – Public Workso MM13 – Chapman University & Public

Workso MM14 – Chapman University


MM 15• Chapman University shall not add new seats or new beds unless the

parking requirements of a particular project in the future could be satisfied. The implementation of development guidelines in the Specific Plan, the action items of the Parking Management Plan, and the City’s project application/review process shall ensure that adequate future supply is provided, and that these future spaces be accessible in relation to future facilities.

MM 16• As new parking structures and/or parking lots are considered, the traffic

circulation evaluation must be updated to ensure that there are no additional impacts beyond the assumptions of the Final EIR, such as impacts on neighboring residential uses.





Time Frame for Implementation: o MM15 – Annual PMP Implementation/

reviewo MM16 – for each major new construction

Responsible Monitoring Agency: o Chapman University, Public Works &

Community Development

Neighborhood Advisory Committee

SPA 5 Mitigation Overview

Chapman UniversityMay 24, 2016

&

spa 5 mitigation overview - chapman blogs...spa 5 mitigation overview ... project (assess...

Documents